ORDER

Date : 18.02.2021 Heard Mr. R. Phukan, learned counsel for the petitioner and Mr. S. Murarka, learned counsel for the respondent.

By this application under Section 24 CPC, the petitioner seeks transfer of the proceeding of MS No. 27/2018 from the court of learned Civil Judge, Sivasagar to any court other than the District Court at Sivasagar.

It appear from the materials available on record that the respondent is a practicing advocate and he had filed a money suit for recovery of money on account of his outstanding fees from the petitioner. On receipt of summons, the petitioner appeared in the suit and contested the same. In respect of a stand taken in the written statement to the effect that the case filed by respondent was based upon false and fabricated documents, the respondent issued a notice to the petitioner, seeking withdrawal of the statement or to face the consequences of criminal proceedings and suit for deformation. According to the petitioner the said notice has created an apprehension in the mind of the petitioner that he would face unhealthy situation on his appearance before the learned trial Court at Sivasagar. The said apprehension is based on the fact that the respondent was an advocate practicing in the said Court.

This application is vehemently objected to by the learned counsel for the respondent.

On a pointed query of this Court, the learned counsel for the petitioner has submitted that as the proceeding of the suit was not stayed by this Court, the proceedings of MS No. 27/2018 is proceeding before the court of learned Civil Judge, Sivasagar and the suit is presently at the stage of evidence of the witnesses of the plaintiff. It appears from the stand taken in this application by the petitioner that he has not yet appeared in person before the learned trial Court. Therefore, the petitioner has not yet faced any untoward situation at Sivasagar. The fact that the suit is proceeding at Sivasagar also shows that the petitioner has been able to get a lawyer to contest the suit at Sivasagar. Therefore, the apprehension expressed by the learned counsel for the petitioner appears to be unfounded.

In the event the petitioner has actually suffered any untoward incident, this would be a simple law and order problem and it would be open to the petitioner to seek appropriate remedy. There is no allegation against the court of being proceeding in the suit in the biased manner. Hence, merely because the respondent happens to be a lawyer who had filed a suit for recovery of his professional fees, the said fact does not constitute a sufficient ground for transferring the suit based on the apprehension which appears in the mind of the petitioner.

As already indicated above, the apprehension which is being created in the mind of the petitioner is based on the notice seeking withdrawal of statement made in the written statement as defamatory. The said apprehension of the petitioner cannot be accepted by this Court to the sufficient cause to justify such apprehension.

Accordingly, this application is found without any merit and the same is dismissed.

JUDGE Comparing Assistant